With the posting of our last Summer 2014 Movie review, THE NOVEMBER MAN (review # 560), we bid an official goodbye to summer and a warm welcome to... Halloween.
As mentioned previously, we will review 1 horror film a day for the month of October, culminating with the review for the 1978 John Carpenter horror classic, HALLOWEEN, on, well, Halloween. Please expect the 31 DAYS OF HALLOWEEN reviews to start posting on October 1, one a day until October 31.
Please find below again the movie listing. There have been a few tweaks based on suggestions.
THE NOVEMBER MAN (2014 - ACTION / THRILLER /
ESPIONAGE) **1/2 out of *****or5 out of 10.
(I guess this is what James Bond does in the off
season...)
CAST:Pierce Brosnan, Luke Bracey, Olga Kurylenko, Eliza Taylor, Caterina
Scorsone, Bill Smitrovich, Lazar Ristovski, Amila Terzihemic, Mediha Musliovic,
Will Patton, Tara Jevrosimovic.
DIRECTOR:Roger Donaldson
WARNING:Some SPOILERS and somewhat uncovincing Bond-Bourne-Taken shenanigans
straight ahead...
IT'S LIKE THIS:We were going to end our Summer 2014 reviews with THE HUNDRED FOOT
JOURNEY and AS ABOVE SO BELOW, but decided to just shelve them for later.THE HUNDRED FOOT JOURNEY is about the eternally-lovely
Helen Mirren running some restaurant in rural France while competing with the
Indian restaurant next door.Or
something.Anyhow, we're saving that
flick for another special "Food Movie Week" like the one we did a few
years ago.And the reason we nixed AS
ABOVE SO BELOW is because it's a horror movie and, well, we're going to be
reviewing a shitload of those (31, to be exact) starting October 1.No worries, though, because we will dust off
that review when the time is right.
So, that left us with an opening, which we gladly
filled with THE NOVEMBER MAN, Pierce Brosnan's attempt to show that he's still
got some Bond game in him yet.Given
that SKYFALL came out almost two years ago, and BOND 24 hasn't even begun
shooting yet and won't be released until next November, and we've pretty much
already worn out our entire James Bond Blu-Ray collection during our regular
Movie Nights, we're seriously jonesing for some Bond-like action and starting
to get the shakes form 007 withdrawal.So when THE NOVEMBER MAN came out on its opening weekend, starring
someone who, you know, actually used to be Bond, we were all over that shit
like Garfield on freshly-baked authentic lasagna.Imagine our immense disappointment, however,
when it turned out be more like stale Chef Boyardee.But more on that in the BUT SERIOUSLY portion
of our review...
Mr. Brosnan plays ex-CIA agent Peter
Devereaux.Imagine James Bond, but more
impatient and with grayer hair.We first
meet him during a training session in Montenegro with young upstart agent David
Mason (Luke Bracey), who disobeys Devereaux's orders and ends up screwing up
the op and getting an innocent bystander killed.To make matters worse, the innocent
bystander is just a kid.Not exactly the
best result, I'd say.Disgusted by the
whole cluster fuck, Devereaux ups and turns in his retirement papers and goes
off to be a barista in Switzerland or something.To be fair, though, it looks like he owns the
cafe, too.So I guess it's not too bad
of a comedown.
Anyway, if a cynical ex-CIA agent could just
retire peacefully and run a cafe on the shores of some Swiss lake, undisturbed
by intrigue and mystery and his former boss, Handley (Bill Smitrovich),
unexpectedly showing up with the offer of "one last job," then there
wouldn't be a goddamned movie - and we would be better off throwing another
Bond Marathon party and doing shots everytime Denise Richards spouts
techno-babble in THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH.Thankfully, Handley does shows his fat mug at Devereaux's coffee shop
and - yeah, baby - offers him "one last job."
Sure, Devereaux hems and haws and acts like he's
as happy in Switzerland as Garfield in a pan of lasagna.But we know better.After all, once a spy, always a spy. Right?Soon enough, Devereaux is passing on the
barista duties to his second-in-command and hightailing it back into the Spy
Game.He winds up in Moscow, where he is
assigned to extract deep-cover operative (and ex-gal pal) Natalia Ulanova
(Mediha Musliovic) because her cover has been blown.Big time.Before Natalia rushes to meet Peter, she manages to steal some
incriminating photos from the office safe of a certain pervert named Arkady
Federov.This wouldn't be so bad, if it
weren't for the slight inconvenience of Federov being just, oh you know, the
President of Russia.God, I hope Putin
doesn't watch this flick.That dude's
dangerously-pissed off enough at the Western World as it is.
Anyhow, Natalia hands off the incriminating
evidence to Devereaux - right before she gets popped in the chest by a
not-so-stray bullet fired by, of all people, David Mason.Remember him from the cluster fuck operation
that opened this film?Yes, folks...he's baaaaaaaaaaack.And ready to fuck up even more shite.Turns out Mason's been holding a grudge
against Devereaux for flunking him in his training - and is ready to even the
score, professionally and personally.Seems the CIA is pitting Mason and Devereaux against each other - but
for what purpose?
Well, Devereaux starts to investigate and eventually
identifies one of the women in the pictures that Natalia stole as one Mira
Filipova, a Balkan refugee who mysteriously disappeared a few years ago.It seems that President Federov is very
interested in tracking her down because of some dirt she has on him.But where has she disappeared to?One person who may know is Alice Fournier
(Olga Kurylenko), an Eastern European social worker who once handled Mira's
political asylum case.Unfortunately,
right around the time Devereaux tracks down Alice, a vicious assassin named
Alexa (Amila Terzihemic) finds her, too - and all hell breaks loose.And let's not forget Mason who is also
looking for Alice and Mira.Add his ass
to the mix and you've got all the ingredients you need for yet another cluster
fuck.
So... where is Mira?And what does she know that could ruin
President Federov?Does Alice know
something that can help?If so, will she
share it with Devereaux?Or Mason?Will Alexa pop a cap in all their asses?Or will one of Federov's secret service goons
do it for her?Will the baddies comes
after Devereaux and Natalia's daughter, Lucy (Tara Jevrosimovic)?And the most important question of all: why
the fuck is this movie called THE NOVEMBER MAN?It came out in the summer, for fuck's sake.
Whatever.Just start shooting the next Bond movie already! I'm getting tired of
bland substitutes!
BUT SERIOUSLY:Earlier, we joked about how THE NOVEMBER MAN promised to be like
freshly-baked lasagna but wound up more like stale Chef Boyardee.Joking aside, the metaphor is very
apropos.The trailers and press for this
flick, while not really promising anything we hadn't seen before, at least
hinted at a possibly-solid espionage thriller that combines elements of the
Bond and Bourne franchises - with a little bit of TAKEN 1 and 2 mixed in.Unfortunately, though, while it certainly
does juggle all those elements, it does so in a very unremarkable way.The end result is a very strong feeling of
deja-vu and, ultimately, a sense of "why bother?"
The three leads certainly can't be faulted.Pierce Brosnan wears the role of
"world-weary spy" like a second skin, and his years playing James
Bond with layers and complexity serves him well here.He manages to give the paper-thin, borderline
cliche role of Peter Devereaux some gravity that a less talented performer
would not have been able to.Just
imagine how much better this film would have been overall if Brosnan had been
given a real meaty role to play rather than sketchy one that he had to flesh
out on his own.
Luke Bracey is a fresh face and is okay in his
role of "brash protege" to Brosnan's "seasoned pro."Unfortunately, the compelling conflict
between Mason and Devereaux that is hinted at early on in the film is never
given full flight.There is a nice, mean
scene where Devereaux confronts Mason and his new girfriend Sarah (Eliza
Taylor), wherein Devereaux brutally pays Mason back (through Sarah) for killing
Natalia earlier.This brief scene hints
at how much more effective this movie would've been if it didn't try to play it
safe through most of its running time. Indeed, this segment feels like it
belongs in one of the meaner, grittier James Bond films like LICENCE TO KILL
and QUANTUM OF SOLACE that unapologetically took no prisoners.This sequence really stands out all the more
because the rest of THE NOVEMBER MAN is so bland.In the end, though, Bracey is also stuck with
even less of a character than Brosnan, and does what he can with it - but with
less success.
The person who really saves this film and allows
it to get a passing grade is OIga Kurylenko who plays the mysterious Alice
Fournier, who may or may not hold the key to the mystery.Kurylenko was the best thing in the
underrated and misunderstood Bond film QUANTUM OF SOLACE (2008), and her character
here feels a bit like a softer reworking (albeit a welcome one) of the
enigmatic, dangerous woman she played in that movie.Whenever she's onscreen, Kurylenko gives this
movie some much-needed energy and emotional pathos.THE NOVEMBER MAN's most satisfying moment is
when Alice defends herself against the relentless assassin, Alexa, without
relying on any of the men around her - and finally makes a big revelation at
the end.Kurylenko's subtle talents
gives this movie what little true feeling it has.As with Brosnan's untapped abilities, imagine
how this movie would have turned out if he and Kurylenko would've been given
some real material to work with.It
would have rivaled even some of the best Bond movies.
Beyond the respectable turns of Brosnan,
Kurylenko, and Bracey in their lead roles, the various characters supporting
them, both good and bad, feel rather generic and almost inter-changeable.The actors playing them do the best they can
to make their parts stand out but they too often blend into the background -
instead of popping and being memorable like the side-players of the best of the
Bourne and Bond films.Also, the script
is strangely all over the place and is remarkably graceless and clunky.I joked to my friend that this movie was "half
of a good movie."What I meant was
there are many potentially-great idea here, but they're all half-baked.While some important revelations and developments (such as the
true identity of Mira Filipova and Mason's conflicted regard for Devereaux) are handled very clumsily and without the proper weight they deserve.
THE NOVEMBER MAN's script also can't decide whether to
focus on Mason and Devereaux's rivalry, or Devereaux and Natalia's past
romantic history, or Mason's relationship with Sarah, or Devereaux's connection
to Alice, or Devereaux's link to his daughter, or the whole Mira Filipova
angle. As a result, none of these elements are adequately addressed. If any one of these threads would
have been teased out sufficiently to form the central narrative cord of THE
NOVEMBER MAN, it would've been a sharper, more potent story.I mean, subplots are fine and even necessary
to enrich and enhance a tale - but you have to know what the true beating heart
of your story is, and always return to that as the movie unfolds, ultimately
coming full circle back to it for an emotionally-satisfying ending.Even the final shot of this film, which
could've closed the film on a somewhat strong note, is fumbled royally.
That THE NOVEMBER MAN is ultimately a
disappointment is made even more puzzling by the fact that it was directed by
Roger Donaldson, who helmed one of my favorite thrillers of all time, NO WAY
OUT - which essentially launched Kevin Costner's career in 1987.That film was the textbook example of how to
create a taut, suspenseful narrative that energetically combines emotional
depth and thrilling setpieces.By
contrast, THE NOVEMBER MAN feels tired and routine - a complete 180 from NO WAY
OUT's pulse-pounding pace and atmosphere.
All in all, though, THE NOVEMBER MAN at least
shows that Pierce Brosnan has still got some fire in him, and could still knock
one of out of the park if given better material.And it also shows that Olga Kurylenko is not
only capable of elevating potentially-mediocre material - but is also deserving
of being recognized as one of the best actresses to have emerged from the Bond
Franchise and grace other films.Go,
Olga...
THE GIVER (2014 - DRAMA / ACTION / MYSTERY)
****1/2 out of *****OR9 out of 10
(I am doing my utmost best to refrain from
cracking any blowjob jokes right now...)
CAST:Jeff Bridge, Meryl Streep, Brenton Thwaites, Alexander Skarsgaard, Katie
Holmes, Odeya Rush, Taylor Swift, Cameron Monaghan, Emma Tremblay.
DIRECTOR:Phillip Noyce
WARNING:Some SPOILERS and some very convincing reasons to celebrate the fucked-up
present and to fear the even more fucked-up future - straight ahead...
IT'S LIKE THIS:Earlier this year we witnessed what happened in a utopian future society
wherein everyone must choose one of five factions - and remain part of it for
the rest of their lives.That movie was
called DIVERGENT, and while everything was painted in hunkey-dorey colors at
the beginning, it soon became clear that this so-called utopia (read: perfect)
was really more of a dystopia (read: screwed-up on so many levels).Soon, it developed that one of the factions,
the stuck-up assholes called "Erudites, " were out to undermine all
the other factions and seize control of society.In other words, imagine your local high school
being taken over by the brains - to the chagrin of the cheerleaders, jocks,
potheads, and artsy-fartsies.Not to
mention the faculty.
Now we have another "Utopia that is really a
Dystopia" flick with our next review.It's titled THE GIVER, and is apparently based on a very popular young
adult book from the 80's.I have not
read it, but the friend I went to see THE GIVER with did.When I asked him how the movie compared to
the novel, his answer was simple and straightforward:"The movie was totally
Hollywoodized."Which wouldn't be
the first time that happened, I guess.
Anyhow, the hero of THE GIVER is Jonas (Brenton
Thwaites), a teenager who lives in the distant future, wherein society has been
streamlined and sanitized to the point of sterility.Everyone is nice to each other.Everyone speaks in precise language without
emotional nuance or subtext.Everyone
colors within the lines and keeps their head down.Everything is black-and-white.Literally: the movie starts out in
black-and-white, I guess to drive home the point that this place is about as
fun as a vacation in Stepford, Connecticut - another place wherein everyone is
all-smiles to the point of freakiness.
This doesn't bother Jonas, though.Nor does it faze his best pals, Fiona (Odeya
Rush), whom he has a major crush on because she's hot, and Asher (Cameron
Monaghan), whom he doesn't because he's a competitive asshole.Jonas, Fiona, and Asher are about to mark a
major milestone in their lives: they are about to come-of-age in a ceremony
wherein the Elders will pick the jobs they will hold for the rest of their
lives.Kind of like the way Tris
(Shailene Woodley) in DIVERGENT had to choose which posse, er, faction she
would run with for the rest of hers.Except in THE GIVER, there's very little chance of Jonas, Fiona, and
Asher winding up working with someone as hot as Four (Theo James) to boss them
around.
But I digress.Anyhow, the Chief Elder (Meryl Streep) grants Asher the duty of Security
Prick (or something like that) and Fiona is given the position of Baby Nurse
Midwife Whatever.For Jonas, though, she
has a very special position in mind:The
Receive Of Memory.You see, when society
decidedly to go all monochramatic, they archived everything from the past like
art, movies, dancing, music, sports, internet, snowboarding, sledding, and
pretty much anything else that used to be, well, colorful and fun.But instead of storing everything in some
library somewhere (although there is a small one that's like a back-up system),
the Elders decided to store the Memories Of All Fun Things in the mind of...
The Giver.
The Giver (Jeff Bridges) trains The Receiver
(Jonas) on all the information, images, and experiences in his mind - and does
a series of "memory transfers" to get all that data, uh,
transferred.Once Jonas has reached
maximum capacity and can control the info, he will then be given the title
of... The New Giver.Until such time a
new, um, Reciever is annointed.Or
something like that.Meanwhile, The Old
Giver will go off somewhere to, I suppose, definitely not havemai-tais on a beach somewhere.That kind of retirement doesn't exist in this
world apparently.
Unfortunately, Jonas takes a little too well to
the memories that are transplanted into his head by The Giver.He learns what it's like to sled down a snowy
hill, swim in the warm ocean, dance like a crazed fool - and essentially behave
like a college student on holiday.Needless to say, he starts to realize that maybe The Things Of The Past
aren't such a bad thing, after all.He
starts to ask more and more questions of The Giver, and pressures him for more
and more "experiences."
There are several people who are not too crazy
about Jonas' overeager desire for more forbidden knowledge:(1) Mother (Katie Holmes), a bitch so stiff
and upright she must have been born with a steel rod shoved up her ass; (2)
Father (Alexander Skarsgaard), a dude so mellow and loose that you have to
wonder if he needs a steel rod shoved up his ass; and (3) The Chief Elder,
herself, who is clearly the person in charge of handing out steel rods to be
jammed up people's asses.Specifically,
the Chief Elder is afraid that Jonas may find out too much about the past - and
might want to change the present and, consequently, the future.Soon, she goes all DIVERGENT on Jonas' ass
and sends the troops after him and The Giver.
Will Jonas and The Giver outsmart the Chief
Elder's thugs and goons?What happens
when Jonas learns that his best pal Asher is in charge of bringing him
down?Will friendship prevail?Or will Asher do his duty and wipe out his
childhood buddy?And what happens when
Jonas discovers a special baby named Gabe who has the same gifts as he and The
Giver? Will he risk his life to protect Gabe?Will Fiona help?How will all
this end?
Let's put it this way: if someone gives - someone
has to receive.But the receiver should
tell the giver not to use any teeth.The
receiver should also give the giver ample warning before he...
I'm just saying.
BUT SERIOUSLY:In our plot breakdown above, we discussed the striking similarities between
DIVERGENT and THE GIVER.Both films
revolve around seemingly-utopian societies that turn out to have something very
wrong about them.Both films deal with
themes of conformity, collectivism, and rebellion.Both films have villains who are well-intentioned
but cross the line in their quest to keep the past from rising up to change the
present and future.And both films are
well-acted and excellently-executed.
I wouldn't be surprised if Veronica Roth, author
of the "Divergent" quadrilogy, was influenced in some small way by
"The Giver."It doesn't really
matter which of the two is more original because there have been striking story
parallels between movies since the art of cinema began.What matters is a good movie is essentially a
story well told - and both DIVERGENT and THE GIVER tell their
individual-yet-related stories very well, indeed.
THE GIVER is based on a book that I gather was
published in the early-80s.How faithful
the movie is to the book, I'm not sure, but the friend I saw the film with says
the cinematic version is much more elaborate in terms of action, suspense, and
special effects.He also saw DIVERGENT
with me several times, and he says that the movie version of "The
Giver" is closer to the Shailene Woodley/Theo James hit film from earlier
this year, than it is to the source novel.The core of the story is still there, he says, but the execution is much
more like that of DIVERGENT: a slick, suspenseful, sci-fi action/thriller.
I haven't read "The Giver" myself, but
I have to say that I enjoyed THE GIVER very much indeed.Like DIVERGENT, it anchors all the action,
intrigue, chases, and thrills in a very poignant, human place.DIVERGENT's emotional core was Tris (Woodley)
trying to find her niche in society, as well as her budding romance with her
icy-but-loyal trainer, Four (James).DIVERGENT worked wonderfully, because it was character-oriented despite
its potentially-complicated plot.THE GIVER
follows the same route, putting us firmly in Jonas' shoes as he tries to navigate
the unexpected position in society he's been given - and the even more
unexpected rewards (and dangers) it brings.
Whereas DIVERGENT dealt with conformity from a
categorization slant, THE GIVER deals with the same issue from the perspective
of removing all emotional complexity.Logic is paramount in THE GIVER's world, and the things of the old world
that made life so chaotic and unpredictable have been banished into the shadows
and the memories of the various Givers throughout the decades.Unfortunately, as Jonas and his friends find
out, a life bereft of chaos and unpredictability isn't much of a life, at
all.The positive flip side of chaos is
passion, and his glimpses of it during his sessions with The Giver make him
realize what they have all been missing.And it's what makes him feel truly alive for the first time in his
life.
Brenton Thwaites is a fairly unknown Australian
actor who takes ownership of his role in very much the same Woodley and James
ran with theirs in DIVERGENT.The character
of Jonas is meant to be someone who has alway conformed and been invisible, but
who suddenly realizes he doesn't want to be invisible anymore.Thwaites makes Jonas' transformation from
mellow, conforming pacifist to fiery, galvanized idealist, a compelling one to
watch.He had a small role as the Prince
in the very good MALEFICENT, and it's nice to see him finally get a true
showcase to run with here.
Odeya Rush and Cameron Monaghan are very
appealing as, respectively, Fiona and Asher, Jonas' confidantes.Rush is particularly affecting in a climactic
scene that blends heart-wrenching poignancy and heart-pounding suspense, in
equal measure.Monaghan, on the other
hand, manages to give Asher some nice nuances, blending duty to his job with
touching loyalty to Jonas.The very
brief shot where Asher surprisingly defies his orders to help his best friend
is a great one - and is a classic example of how to load emotional complexity
in a single line of dialogue.
As for the older cast members, Alexander
Skarsgaard and Katie Holmes are spot-on as Jonas' obedient parents.Skarsgaard, with his soft puppy dog eyes,
ably conveys the quiet resignation beneath Father's mellow surface, giving us
the sense that, like Jonas, he questions many things about the world he lives
in, but doesn't have his son's courage to upset the status quo and make
changes.Meanwhile, Holmes is eerily
effective as the controlling mother who monitors her family's every move like a
hawk.Despite the
"girl-next-door" aura that she started her career with, Holmes is
actually best playing strong ballbusters (like Rachel Dawes in BATMAN BEGINS),
and she turns Mother into a similarly-formidable figure.
Then, of course, there are the Great Meryl Streep
and Jeff Bridges, as respectively, The Chief Elder and The Giver.Needless to say, Streep and Bridges are
acting royalty and command every scene they are in.However, they do this without hogging the
limelight, and always graciously share center stage with their co-stars.Bridges as The Giver has a nice father-son
rapport with Jonas, and he has the perfect paternal chemistry with Thwaites
that sells their relationship - which is crucial because the link between The
Giver and The Receiver is the emotional core of this film.Like Jonas, The Giver is someone whose
seemingly placid exterior hides a sharp, strategic mind that is very quickly
putting things together and planning counter-attacks - and Bridges' similar
laconic-but-with-razor-wits is perfect for the character.
No review of THE GIVER would be complete without
discussing the wonderful enigma that is Meryl Streep.Streep is one of my favorite actresses
because of her ability to be mysterious, aloof, and distant, yet open,
friendly, and vulnerable at the same time.She's one of the few actresses that actually slip seamlessly into the
skins of her character, and the Chief Elder is her latest sterling
example.Just like Jeanine Matthews
(Kate Winslet) from DIVERGENT, the Chief is driven not by rage or profit - but
by an idealogy that she is willing to kill or die for.
I've often said that the best villains are not
evil, but simply have agendas they will do anything to see realized.Often, these agendas make perfect sense - but
what makes these people baddies is they believe in their plans so much they are
willing to hurt innocent people for it.For them, the means always justify the ends - any means, even deadly
ones.And that makes them much, much
more dangerous because it's hard to reason with them.A villain driven by rage can possibly be
stopped by kindness, compassion, and forgiveness, while one motivated by money
can be bought off.But an antagonist who
believes deeply and passionately in a cause or goal, so much so that they are
willing to sacrifice anything or anyone (even themselves) for it, is probably
the most formidable foe there is.Streep brings this unsettling quality to vivid life, effectively
combining a wistful sadness with cool, understated menace.Is there a role this woman can't play?I think not.
Ultimately, THE GIVER and DIVERGENT have many
things in common, plot-wise: compelling stories, stellar casts, suspenseful
action, and profound themes.But the
most important thing they share is this: they are two the best of Summer 2014's
films.And that is special common
ground, indeed.
LET'S BE COPS(2014 - COMEDY / ACTION) ***1/2 out of *****OR7
out of 10
(Let's hope they're not wearing G-strings under
those outfits.I'm just saying...)
CAST:Jake Johnson, Damon Wayans Jr., Nina Dobrev, Rob Riggle, Andy Garcia,
James D'Arcy, Joshua Ormond, Keegan Michael Key, Jonathan Lajole.
DIRECTOR:Luke Greenfield
WARNING:Some SPOILERS and some not very convincing faux cops - straight ahead
IT'S LIKE THIS:Back in 2012 we reviewed 21 JUMP STREET (review # 444), the cinematic
adaptation of the 80's TV show wherein doofus cops Jenko (Channing Tatum) and
Schmidt (Jonah Hill) were recruited into their precinct's "Jump
Street" program.Apparently, this
involved posing as high school students to curb any drug problems in local
school hallways.This proved a little
too successful: let's just say a couple of developmentally-arrested douches
like these two going undercover as developmentally-arrested douches who are
still in school is kind of like Kim Kardashian going undercover at some
Bootylicious Festival Celebration of Big Asses.
Then, this summer, we saw the return of Jenko and
Schmidt as they were given another shot to fuck things up while undercover -
this time in college.22 JUMP STREET
(review # 552) proved to be even more of a Nutball Extravaganza, as we watched
our two doofus heroes pitch headlong into the fray of classes, hangovers,
fraternity parties, football games, and walks-of-shame.Ahem.Let's just say you haven't lived until you've seen nerdball Schmidt
trudge home across campus in the wee hours of the morning after having
discovered someone used his ass for just one night.Deal with it, tubby.It can be fun.
Now, in our latest review, we find out what
happens when the whole "cops-go-undercover-as-doofuses" gets inverted
into "doofuses-go-sort-of-undercover-as-cops."The flick is titled LET'S BE COPS and
everything you need to know about this film is essentially there in the "as-simple-as-it-sounds"
title.Our heroes are two slacker Los
Angelenos: Ryan (Jake Johnson) and Justin (Damon Wayans Jr.).And while I wouldn't go so far as to say they
make Jenko and Schmidt look like rocket scientists, our boys from 21 & 22
JUMP STREET have very little reason to feel insecure around these two
goobers.
Justin is the "Schmidt" of the two; you
know: the smart, shy, geeky, socially-inept one whose brains often get in the
way of his dick and thereby ruin what little game he has.Except Justin is black and in much better
shape than Schmidt, who is pasty and always looked like he was one jelly
doughnut away from being booted off the force.Ryan, on the other hand, is the "Jenko" of the duo; you
know:the somewhat hot, thoroughly
libido-driven skeeze whose dick often is in control of the caboose, with his
(minimal) brains decidedly trussed up like a turkey in the trunk.Needless to say, we've seen these two
before.
While Justin has a thankless job in a
"pay-your-dues" position as some asshole executive's personal
assistant in a video game company, this does not stop him from having big
dreams.Specifically, he wants to pitch
and peddle a first-person shooter game called, ahem, "Patrolman L.A."Or something like that.Never mind that his demo material for the
game looks a lot like a cartoon version of that cheesy 70's show
C.H.I.P.S.Only somehow more lame.If that's even remotely possible.
But at least Justin has dreams.I'm not sure what the fuck Ryan has.When he's not pretending to be coaching touch
football for a bunch of snot-nosed kids who don't seem to know who the hell he
is, he basically macks on anything that doesn't have the common sense to zap
him with a tazer within the first few seconds.Oh, and he once starred in a commercial for a genital herpes cream.Suffice it to say, neither of these two have
exactly conquered the world since leaving high school.Which makes it particularly awkward when they
get an invitation to their 10th Reunion.
Fortunately, according to the invite, it is a
masquerade-themed reunion.Meaning
Justin and Ryan could easily don some sophisticated eyemasks, elegant tuxedos,
and totally work that "mysterious-stranger-returns-from-10-years-overseas"
routine.Hell, wearing that kind of
outfit, these dunderheads could easily get away with saying they work for the,
um, government but, uh, cannot exactly disclose what they do.James Bond does it, and look how much pussy
and ass he gets.
Unfortunately, our Mensa candidate Ryan
interprets "masquerade" as "costume party" and utters those
three (four?) words that will change his and Justin's life forever.Hint: look at the title of this movie - and
think real hard.
Before you know it, our two idiots are dressed up
like Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Pena from END OF WATCH (but more laughable)
and are be-bopping their dumb asses down to the reunion.And before you know it, their former
classmates - dressed elegantly in proper masquerade attire - are looking at
them like a couple of jackholes who just saw END OF WATCH and got a little
carried away.In other words, not the
best of reunion experiences, folks.
Fortunately (or unfortunately), there are a lot
of stupid women in this world who are apparently easily-swayed by a
uniform.Sure enough, while our two
dejected faux cops are walking home from their train wreck of a high school
reunion, they notice that a lot of sexy honeys are... smiling and checking them
out, all lascivious-like.Apparently,
it's the police uniforms they have on.According to this movie, LAPD outfits are kind of like the fashion
equivalent of beer goggles: with them on, anyone looks hot.Essentially, the moral of the story is
this:guys, if you're having a hard time
scoring with the fairer sex, slip on a police uniform and the females will be
lining up for your spermatozoas.Well,
you know what I mean.
Soon enough, our two Milli Vanilli cops are
milking their fake status as policemen, and have distorted the LAPD's
mantraof "To Serve and
Protect" into "To Cruise For Chicks and Generally Behave Like The
Kind of Policeman Who Eventually Gets Investigated By Internal
Affairs."Except these two
boneheads don't have to worry about that because, as we have painstakingly
found out, they're not really cops.They, do, however, have to worry about being charged with impersonating
law officers and driving a fake cop car with even faker credentials.Oh, I forgot to mention that Justin and Ryan
bought a car on Ebay and souped it up to look like an LAPD vehicle?My bad.They obviously felt they hadn't broken enough laws - and stepped up
their stupidity a level or two.
Soon, however, Justin and Ryan's pseudo-law
enforcement shenanigans land them into some hot water with a Russian criminal
figure named Mossi (James D'Arcy), who doesn't like cops mucking about in his
turf, let alone fake ones.It doesn't
help that Josie (Nina Dobrev), the girl Justin has a crush on, actually buys
Justin and Ryan's END OF WATCH routine and is counting on them to put Mossi
away and clean up her neighborhood.Where did they find this dumb bitch?I bet she thinks Santa and the Easter Bunny are real, too.
Now, our two "heroes" must make a hard
choice:(1) do the right thing and
finally start acting like real heroes and put a stop to Mossi's reign of
terror - or (2) continue to act like super-tools playing cop dress-up just to
net some L.A. poontang.Hmmmmmm... which
will they choose?
Men are not complex creatures, folks.Bet on the poontang.
BUT SERIOUSLY:In past reviews, we've talked about what elevates a movie into the realm
of solidly-good films and above.A lot
of good films have premises that didn't sound like much, but were deployed in
such a way that the end result was a fairly engaging and entertaining
ride.Which leads to something we've
discussed a lot lately: execution.Execution can make or break a film.A great idea, ill-executed, can produce a weak film; conversely, a weak
idea, well-executed, can create a good or better film.LET'S BE COPS is a prime example of the
latter.
On the surface, you'd think that a film about two
underachievers posing as cops for fun wouldn't amount to much, but director
Luke Greenfield and co-writer Nicholas Thomas wring some pretty funny and
clever ideas and situations from this paper-thin scenario.It helps immeasurably that leads Jake Johnson
and Damon Wayans Jr. are ideally-cast (especially Johnson).These talented elements both in front of and
behind the camera keep the film coasting at a brisk, amusing pace that
constantly finds creatively funny detours.
However, the most vital characteristic that
differentiates a good and better film from all others is a solid emotional core
that allows you to care and root for its characters.The stronger the emotional core and the more
powerful the concern for the characters, the higher a film rates.Many movies are passable, even above average,
entertainment - but what often keeps them from being anything more than that is
lack of any real connection with the characters.
In LET'S BE COPS, the most surprising thing is
how our regard for Justin and Ryan deepens as we enter the third act of the
film.It becomes clear that Greenfield
and Thomas have been carefully planting some thematic seeds and setting up some
narrative threads that will pay off later on - but doing it in a way that
doesn't feel calculated and false.We
are so busy laughing at Justin and Ryan's raucous shenanigans that we aren't
aware of their overall character arcs until they've snuck up on us. There's a reason why this film has shown great
legs at the box-offuce after a decent opening: it's not just a funny movie -
it's a funny movie with relatable, likable, sympathetic characters.
Lending solid support to Johnson and Wayans is an
interesting, varied supporting cast.Rob
Riggle turns in a suprisingly stoic, straight-laced (for him) character as Sgt
Segars, a real LAPD cop who ends up partnering with our fake officers.Riggle has been so vivid and effective as
hilariously-loony wild cards in flicks like THE HANGOVER, 21 JUMP STREET, and
22 JUMP STREET, that its refreshing (and endearing) to see him play a
supportive, sensible brother figure to our heroes.Nina Dobrev is appropriately lovely and
fetching as Justin's love interest, Josie.Unsurprisingly, the character of Josie spends a bit of time on the back
burner, but at least the script gives her some opportunities to contribute to
the plot.
As for the villains, James D'Arcy makes for a
suitably slimy and hissable baddie, but the real surprise is Andy Garcia's
appearance as a corrupt cop whom Justin and Ryan unwisely lock horns with.I've been a fan of Garcia's for years, and
he's been the strong points of movies like BLACK RAIN, JENNIFER 8, OCEAN'S
11-13, CITY ISLAND, THE GODFATHER 3, and WHEN A MAN LOVES A WOMAN.However, we've liked him the most in his
darker roles that are either morally-ambiguous or downright villainous - and
he's in fine baddie form here.
Ultimately, LET'S BE COPS becomes much more than
your average comedy by taking a potentially flimsy premise - and making it work
by using creativity and humanity.While
it is not quite at the superb level of 21 & 22 JUMP STREET, it can still
sit comfortably just a rung or two below them.For a movie that had not much fanfare at the beginning nor any claims to
greatness, that is no small praise.
